S
Guest
Really good summary and explanations by him, thanks.
Really good summary and explanations by him, thanks.
Classy as always. GGs to Hera, he still played against all the best players except Yo. It's no small feat to beat Tatoh, Lierey, Viper and Jordan in the same tournament, but that rule really ****ed up the semi and it's understandable Viper felt frustrated by this. He had a game plan and he could not go for it.
G1 - FixedLongtime lurker for years here. Don't make this into viper fans war the issue at hand here is competitive integrity. There should be no circumstance that someone gets 3 home maps and another player gets 1. I believe Hera who won would agree with that. Truth is he may have won anyways if the home maps were split 2-2.
The solution for this was very simple. You can keep maps 1 - 4 - 7 fixed if that was the wish of the organizer. The correct format should have been
G1 - Fixed
G2 - Loser of G1 home map
G3 - Loser of G2 home map
G4 - Fixed
G5 - Loser of G3 home map
G6 - Home map goes to player with less home maps played
G7 - Fixed
I think this was done as a gimmick to help the player down in a series to try and force a longer series. The way it played out G6 / G7 were civ matchups in favor of John The Fearless because players will always pick to win on their home maps.
In the end I am happy to see Hera win. He deserves a big tourney win. He played amazing. The point of this is for feedback to pressure organizers to make it fair.
If you are a Viper fan can emphatize easily. If you are a Hera fan think if the situation was opposite and Hera's loss could be blamed for him only getting 1 home map instead of 2. Tournaments these days are coming down to the smallest of margins. There doesnt need to be gimmicks anymore to force longer tournaments.
Great tournament nonetheless. #LetsFixForNextTime!
personally I didn't even pay enough attention to the event to know viper had only 1 home map vs hera's 3, and I honestly do not care, but if the goal is to have a competitive tournament to distribute $80k, then perhaps some very basic things like not giving blatant advantages to one player for no reason at all should be figured out by the organizers.it's not about the viewers, but if you sign up to a tourney and don't read the rules it's on you. If you read the rules and you don't say anything it's on you.
If there is no player openly complaining about this, why would the viewers care?
If the players are complaining in private to their friends, how should the organizer know/ why care?
You guys act all shocked but if you actually cared you would start this thread BEFOREHAND. Also like someone said this thread wouldn't even exist if it hadn't been viper eliminated.
And most importantly, why do you guys think you're talking for the players? If they want to/ feel like they have to, they will voice their opinion.
I completely agree that this is properly more an oversight than a deliberate design – and I think what everyone is seeing/feeling here: is that AoE2 is finally a grown up competitive game.People here are acting like T90 or robo made these settings on purpose so that one player would gain an advantage. I think it's more likely an oversight on their part and it's unfortunate that it turned out like this.
Keep in mind that this rule was in HC2 finals as well as HC3 semis and finals and nobody noticed because both players got 2 homemaps in every set.
Funny enough this was noticed in HC3. I do not remember which set, but chat kept asking questions "Why pick 3 home maps if you can only use two" and someone had made a small spreadsheet how can that happen in a 4:3 with 3 home maps for one player, the thing that everyone missed on that, is that the other player would have 1. I remember even T90 was explaining this on the stream once last year.Can't believe no one noticed that it's possible for one player to get 3 home maps while the other only gets one. What a joke.
It takes away from hera's win because he barely beat viper with a 3-1 homemap advantage. For all we know he could have won anyway, but he didn't get the chance to win in a fair match.
They are responsible for the rules. Carelessness doesnt remove this responsibility. it just lowers the amount of "guilt". I dont like this argumentation. It is on a somewhat childish level. Ben broke Tina's toy while playing with it and screams: "I didnt do it intentionally, maan", because he cannot deal with the feeling of guilt. I think a simple apology for the oversight is totally enough between friends, noone wants their heads. Hosting such prestigeful tournaments with big prizepools is a privilege and knowing the hosts are aware of this and are cautious with their rules for the integrity of the tournament is some reassuring thought, knowing that there are people relying on this tournaments to be able to do what they do. And being open to change their rules according to multi-angled feedback.People here are acting like T90 or robo made these settings on purpose so that one player would gain an advantage. I think it's more likely an oversight on their part and it's unfortunate that it turned out like this.
I think here its also different, since it was no neutral map for game 7 (in HC3 it was mudflow) but its a map that with its aggressivity is more on the side of the strengths of Tempo/aM players, therefore they picked it as homemap during the early rounds. I believe it has nothing to do with what players are favorite where but hosts just went through the four new maps without any thought behind. I would feel with arabia as decider game a bit safer.Keep in mind that this rule was in HC2 finals as well as HC3 semis and finals and nobody noticed because both players got 2 homemaps in every set.
no one was acting like thatPeople here are acting like T90 or robo made these settings on purpose so that one player would gain an advantage.
I'm not sure your example holds up. It's not Ben who's screaming "I didn't do it intentionally, maan" but Jerry an outsider saying "I don't think he broke it on purpose" while some people are yelling at Ben because he broke the toy and that he always breaks toys.They are responsible for the rules. Carelessness doesnt remove this responsibility. it just lowers the amount of "guilt". I dont like this argumentation. It is on a somewhat childish level. Ben broke Tina's toy while playing with it and screams: "I didnt do it intentionally, maan", because he cannot deal with the feeling of guilt. I think a simple apology for the oversight is totally enough between friends, noone wants their heads. Hosting such prestigeful tournaments with big prizepools is a privilege and knowing the hosts are aware of this and are cautious with their rules for the integrity of the tournament is some reassuring thought, knowing that there are people relying on this tournaments to be able to do what they do. And being open to change their rules according to multi-angled feedback.
I think most people are talking about the 3 vs 1 homemaps. That was the same in HC2 finals and HC3 semi/finals.I think here its also different, since it was no neutral map for game 7 (in HC3 it was mudflow) but its a map that with its aggressivity is more on the side of the strengths of Tempo/aM players, therefore they picked it as homemap during the early rounds. I believe it has nothing to do with what players are favorite where but hosts just went through the four new maps without any thought behind. I would feel with arabia as decider game a bit safer.
Well, given that Viper was completely surprised by this after Game 5, I think he would rather have drafted different if it was generally known that he might play on 3 of Hera's HM while only playing on 1 of his.One point that most people are missing is that IF the rules were different, then the draft would likely also be different.
The counterfactual of "What would have happened if each player had 2 HM each?" doesn't make much sense to me.
Maybe should have read rules before last 3 hidden cup ? It's now only issue as viper lostWell, given that Viper was completely surprised by this after Game 5, I think he would rather have drafted different if it was generally known that he might play on 3 of Hera's HM while only playing on 1 of his.
Playing with a 3 to 1 home map advantage would have been a problem even if Viper won. It's not discussed because it's Viper, it's discussed because it's dumb no matter who profits from itMaybe should have read rules before last 3 hidden cup ? It's now only issue as viper lost
Nothing to do with Viper. I 100% wanted Hera to beat Viper, yet you have to be fair and this wasn't.Maybe should have read rules before last 3 hidden cup ? It's now only issue as viper lost